ARMY SUPPLEMENTARY RESERVE. (Hansard, 2 April 1925)

§ Mr. SAKLATVALA
I may again say what. I said in vain the other day, that I feel compelled to face a little unpopularity in this House, which, at times, from mistaken zeal and wrong standards of patriotic duty, sets in a sort of conspiracy against the wishes and freedom of the masses of this country. I am referring to the questions I have put to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War on the matter of the Army Supplementary Reserve. The Secretary of State for War, in explaining the Supplementary Reserve Force, on the 16th March, opened the subject with this grave and serious argument He said: I want to say a word or two about the Supplementary Reserve which was started by my predecessor last year. The Supplementary Reserve was started in order to attract skilled tradesmen who are becoming more and more necessary to the Army. The demand is greater than the supply corning in normally through the ordinary channels. A little further on the right hon. Gentleman said: I cannot too emphatically repeat that the object of the Supplementary Reserve is to complete the Regular Army on mobilisation with technical tradesmen, since our peace establishments combined with our existing Army Reserve do not suffice for the increased numbers of tradesmen required, and, in order to avoid what might be fatal delay on mobilisation, we want a cut-and-dried scheme developed in peace time."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th March, 1925; cols. 1887–8. Vol. 181.] The right hon. Gentleman had referred to his predecessor in office, and the ex-Secretary of State for War, in the same Debate, spoke as follows: If an Army is to exist it should exist upon efficient lines. You might as well abolish it altogether if you are not going to have it efficient."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th March, 1925; col. 1896, Vol. 181.] The Secretary of State for War, as well as his predecessor in office, have both agreed that the Army as it stands is not efficient. Therefore, it may as well be disbanded. The Secretary of State for War has said that if it is not supplemented by enlisting people in particular trades, the delay in mobilisation would be fatal. Nothing could be more emphatic than these two assertions, that 1696 it is of the highest importance to this country that the War Office should get into this Reserve Force men from particular trades in sufficient numbers, and assure the nation that the Army is efficient, and there would be no fatal catastrophe at the time of a sudden mobilisation. Nothing could be plainer than that the first duty of the War Office is to keep an accurate record of the men who are joining the Supplementary Reserve, and from what trades they are coming, in order that a sufficient number from each trade is coming forward. I put these questions one after another, making allowances for the democratic spirit of this House, and I have put the same questions in a roundabout manner in five different forms, and I am still without an answer, because this democratic House can easily be dodged out of an answer. The same Secretary of State for War tells me that the numbers of men who have joined and the trades to which they belong are not available at the War Office, and he does not think the information would be of sufficient value to justify the labour involved in collecting it from the Record Office where it is kept. It is simply astounding that the Secretary of State for War and his predecessor, having laid so much importance upon men in particular trades joining in adequate numbers, are of the opinion that the War Office does not intend to collect for the country the information that is available
For the first few days I was left under the impression that this information does not exist, but after a few pressing questions, when I saw the attestation form I found that Question 5 put to every recruit this inquiry "What is your occupation or trade?" Therefore, all the War Office have to do is to collect the answers under the heading of Question 5. If the War Office have any regard for the nation, and if the higher staff have anything like ability, the first thing they would do would be to get an honest and open record of the number of tradesmen from each trade who are joining If they have any regard for the opinion of the nation, which pays them and keeps them, their duty is to tell the nation from time to time how many men have joined from particular trades. If they have regard for public opinion and the democratic opinion of the trade unions it is their bounden duty to 1697 come out frankly and say that they have put forward a scheme which is considered highly objectionable by the trade union members, that the country is in a state of danger, and that the Army would be better disbanded, according to the opinion expressed by the predecessor in office of the present Secretary of State for War.
The Secretary of State for War in another passage, made a remark about my party which shows that he has the same conception that is held by several of my colleagues on this side of the House He said: No doubt the Communists do claim that in no circumstances should the Army or the Reserve be used in support of the civil power, but hitherto trade union leaders have never argued that the State is not entitled; if the police force proves insufficient, to claim the assistance of the armed forces of the Crown,"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th March, 1925; col. 1889, Vol. 181.] This knowledge of the Communist party's objection, on the part of the Secretary of State for War, may have been obtained in the dining-rooms or the smoke rooms of the Conservative Club. But I may assure him that that is not the full objection of the Communist party. The objection of the trade union worker, which is the objection of the Communist party, goes far beyond the objection that has been pointed out by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. J. H. Thomas), who took part in the same Debate, and wound up with the pious hope that sweet reasonableness may prevail, and recruiting go on in full force.
I emphatically say on this question that the House is entering into a conspiracy against the right and freedom of the trade union workers. The whole position is this, that the men in the trade union movement are not unwilling to join because they are afraid of being used as blacklegs—that is only a part of it—but that a large section of the working classes now realise that an international war is as criminal an act as a civil war in the same nation. That is the fact and the factor which the Government and some of our friends seem to be very anxious to conceal at the time when they ought to tell the nation frankly about the new position. It is the duty of the War Office to get out these figures, and to publish them, not only once but periodically, and then, if they saw that the trade union workers realised their own consciousness 1698 and refused to join this Supplementary Reserve, it would be the duty of the War Office to say so.
I submit the futility of the assurance of a few trade union committees and leaders here and there. The Communist party is right in its own attitude that an international war of the working classes against the working classes of any other country is as criminal and fratricidal as civil war at home. That is the outlook of the Communist trade union worker. That does not distinguish, as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. J. H. Thomas) seems to distinguish, that it is a sinful thing to blackleg and chop the head off a British railway worker, and that it is the height of patriotism to blackleg and chop the head off a German worker. Those times are gone. To-day a recognised official committee of the Trade Union Congress of this country are receiving in open welcome, as they ought to have done six years ago, the representatives of the Russian Trade Union leaders who are coming here to consult one another as to how the workers of Russia and Britain should unite together to fight the financiers and capitalists of Britain and any other country, and at that moment we are told that the same trade union movement is ready to throw trade union workers into the Army when they are going to fight Russian workers at the behest of their British capitalist masters. These are contradictions which are irreconcilable and, if allowed to go on, will create a grave situation which the Secretary of State for War may find will prove fatal at a time of mobilization, and according to the ex-Secretary of State for War the Army will be so inefficient that it may as well be wound up.
The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby as a Member of the International Trade Union Federation sitting in Amsterdam promised the German workers that if they were attacked the British trade unionists will stand by their side in an international solidarity of trade union workers. We are told at the same time that the British worker will join the Supplementary Army in order to go and blackleg the German worker to work the German railways and shoot the German down if necessary. These two things are not going to happen. It is the duty now of all statesmen to be honest and frank 1699 on this position. We cannot talk diplomatic language in this House and go and talk the men's language in the countryside. There must be a common understanding, and that can only be arrived at by facing facts, and the facts to-day are—I for one, and my party, as such are not ashamed in stating it—that we consider it our sacred and religious duty to tell all the British workers to keep away from the Army as well as from the Supplementary Reserve, as long as there is an Army for fighting capitalist wars in one country or another. It is on that account alone that the railway workers and other workers are unwilling to join this Supplementary Reserve. It is the duty of the Government, and of the trade union leaders, to disclose the fact, if that is the fact. I would suggest that the Government should give us some indication that they now realise the gravity of the situation, and will give up the childish nonsense that it is of no public importance to collect these figures and publish them, so as to show the nation whether the Supplementary Reserve is going on all right, and how many Reservists are joining in particular trades like the railway workers, engine drivers, automobile drivers, electrical engineers, miners, sappers, and so on.

§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Captain Douglas King)
I am sure all those hon. Members who have taken the trouble to remain as long as this have been very interested to hear the exposition of Communist principles to which we have listened. I have listened carefully, and I can find very little to which the hon. Member has really asked me to reply. I will deal with his last statement first. With regard to the suggestion of blacklegging, either in this country or any other country, I think it is realised by trade union leaders and trade unionists throughout the country that the Supplementary Reserve is not being recruited with the idea of blacklegging anywhere they are to be used for the assistance of an expeditionary force, but will only be used in cases of emergency. The real 1700 point the hon. Member raised was the complaint that he had been refused information with regard to certain facts. Most hon. Members will appreciate that the War Office, like other Government Departments, try to give all reasonable information for which they are asked, and which they can reasonably be expected to have in their possession. the hon. Gentleman complained that he asked in vain for how many of each trade had already been enrolled in the Supplementary Reserve. I can only explain that that is not the basis on which our records are kept. I can tell him from week to week how many men have been enrolled, but we take our numbers from the various arms of the service into which the men are enrolled, such as Royal Artillery, Royal Engineers, Royal Corps of Signallers, Royal Army Service Corps, Royal Army Medical Corps. Royal Army Ordnance Corps, Royal Army Veterinary Corps, and nearly all the technical trades are common to these corps.
From the administrative point of view I have been interested to hear the way in which the hon. Member thinks the War Office should be administered and organised. At the same time as our organisation exists we want to know how many men we have in the different arms, and as regards trades, I can only say that up to the 21st of last month we had enrolled in category C 4,295 men. That is in five months' recruiting. Recruiting started only on 15th October. We have obtained over one-third of the total establishment under Category C. The total establishment is 12,682. Under Category B the total members enrolled to 21st March were 1,803. Therefore, the hon. Member can see that it is not a fact that the trade unionists of the country are refusing to come forward to join the Supplementary Reserve. They are coming forward quite satisfactorily.

§ Mr. MAXTON
They are not rushing in wildly, are they?